Choosers or Losers?

A new report called Choosers or Losers? Influences on Young People's Choices about Drugs in Inner-City Dublin has departed considerably from previous studies by including within its scope the rationale underlying young people's drug-use. Author Paula Mayock, of the Children's Research Centre at Trinity College Dublin, interviewed many middle-range drug-users (eg cannabis and E), as well as abstainers and very young heroin-users. Much previous research has left these particular groups out, its focus being adult heroin-users.

Mayock's report examines the use and, importantly, the non-use of drugs by 15-19-year-olds, in an inner-city area where drug-use is highly concentrated.
"Considerable time and effort were invested in the establishment of trust and rapport with prospective research participants," says Mayock. "I had to familiarise myself with the social landscape in terms of where the young hung out, and the different areas for different drug-taking. For example, cannabis-smokers wouldn't hang out in heroin areas.
"I had to establish street credibility. I didn't want to be perceived as an authority figure or a rat." Respondents categorised themselves as abstainers, drug-takers or problem drug-takers, in accordance with how they viewed themselves at the time of interview.
Among Mayock's findings:
Drug initiation took place, on average, at 13.2 years for drug-takers, and 12.4 years for problem drug-takers. Cannabis, followed by inhalants, dominated as the drugs first used. For the majority, cannabis use was an accepted norm and was not considered to be a 'deviant' activity.
Early heroin-use was a covert activity and young people went to considerable lengths to conceal it from adults and peers. The time lapse between first heroin use and dependence varied from six months to one year. The onset of dependence frequently took young people by surprise.
Drug avoidance did not necessarily imply total abstinence. Respondents made an effort to self-regulate their intake and to reduce the potential harm resulting from drug-use.
The majority rejected the suggestion that they were 'pressurised' into drug use. The most commonly stated incentives for drug-use included availability, curiosity, pleasure and fun, peer group membership and the alleviation of boredom and negative self-thought.
Young people assessed the benefits and dangers associated with various drugs. Judgements about the relative 'safety' versus 'risk' associated with using various substances strongly influenced their drug choices. Drug use was rarely pursued in the absence of perceived rewards.
According to Mayock, "Discussions of youth and drugs can often veer dangerously towards the view that drug-taking is a largely irrational behaviour with benefits that are entirely ill-conceived by the user. This current study has gone some way towards redressing this imbalance."
Mayock believes that harm reduction must play a much stronger role than it presently does in drug policies and education. "Blanket 'say no' approaches to drugs leave us with very little to say to young people who say yes to drugs. They know that drugs don't always have detrimental consequences. The advantage of harm reduction is that there is some chance that young people will respond.
"Young people need to be able to establish fact from myth and to make informed choices about their use of drugs. They need to learn to apply skills which minimise the harm caused by drugs. In short, they need to be equipped with the necessary skills and knowledge to cope with a drug-using world."

Paula Mayock is keen to hear from anyone on this and related subjects. Her e-mail is
[email protected]